Thanks for helping out jody, your qa on the build system was excellent and very much needed. Sometimes I get so involved in battling with maven that I forget to keep my head above water :)
However, I think its time for some clean up on the build system. While this workaround gets us a release its not really acceptable. Adrian has volunteered to help us with releases, but because he is not a maven expert he cant. -Justin Jody Garnett wrote: > Justin Deoliveira wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> After ripping out my hair for a few days I can still not get a release to >> go. > Release is now gone :-) >> Javadoc seems to be completley broken. > Agreed, I got a null pointer exception from our magic plug-in. I have > updated the release instructions to *not* include javadoc generation > until such time as it works. >> problems with the following >> modules: >> >> plugin/epsg-hsql >> > did not find a problem. >> ext/widgets-spring >> > did not find a problem. >> ext/go >> > did not find a problem. >> ext/shape >> > Was missing an svn:ignore on a generated index file. >> And there could be more, I gave up after 4 errors. So we are stuck without >> javadocs, and if we want a release we have to manually do everything, >> which is a pain. >> > Ended up reading the release:perform instructions, by default this goal > does "deploy" and "site-deploy". The wiki has been updated > with an example showing how to get it to do only "deploy". >> I will not have any more time to put toward this until next week. I should >> also note that GeoServer is not making it project policy to release >> against official geotools releases due to the overhead of releasing >> geotools and not having a working release process. >> > Please make use of yesterdays release, geotools needs to (and will fix) > the overhead of making a release. I would like to set things up so > projects like uDig and GeoServer can ask for a release given one weeks > notice and expect to see results. > > With respect to the "larger" problem of why the release process was broken. > - QA tools added to the build chain, and only tested for maven install > (rather then full release process) > - files left on the 2.2.x branch that were needed for assembly of > release artifacts > - focus on javadocs destracted from real need to produce results > - lack of communication (both wiki instructions and email on release > progress) > > I am sure we can do better next time :-) > Jody > > PS. I am working on a steering document that I will try and share with > the list shortly, feedback from the geoserver community in terms of > expectations is important and needed. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT > Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your > opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash > http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV > _______________________________________________ > Geoserver-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel > > !DSPAM:1004,451c109828272081064789! > -- Justin Deoliveira The Open Planning Project [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
